Apple Patents "Enforceable" Ad Viewing On Devices 439
Rexdude writes "Apple has filed a patent that forces users to interact with an ad. FTFA: 'Its distinctive feature is a design that doesn't simply invite a user to pay attention to an ad — it also compels attention. The technology can freeze the device until the user clicks a button or answers a test question to demonstrate that he or she has dutifully noticed the commercial message. Because this technology would be embedded in the innermost core of the device, the ads could appear on the screen at any time, no matter what one is doing.'" We've been
following this story for awhile now but it seems to have broken into the mainstream.
Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Funny)
Hello Apple? I have a problem with my iPhone. Every time it shows an advertisement, the screen gets smashed. Can you help?
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Interesting)
I was seriously starting to consider buying an iPhone. Then I see this patent, and think "I will never buy such a product".
But your post gives me hope; if everyone called apple support every time they saw an ad like this, it would be awesome.
"Hello Apple? I was dialing 9-1-1, but I only got 9-1 in, and then this screen popped up and asked me how many horsepower are in the new lexus, and now my house has all burnt to the ground, and I had to borrow the neighbor's phone because my iPhone is unusable until I answer this stupid question. BTW, can you give me the legal department's number?"
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Insightful)
When somebody like Sony tries to pull an anti-consumer move, you get crap like UMD, or blu-ray players that need to spend 15 minutes downloading updates before your squalling brat can watch whatever disney tripe will satisfy their 15 second attention span. Or intel's ill-fated
Even if joe consumer doesn't know what DRM is, has never thought about its implications, wouldn't know "software freedom" if it bit him in the ass, things like that will piss him off anyway. With apple, though, it is different. Their anti-consumer moves are so shiny, so polished, so elegant, that even people who ostensibly do care about DRM and things will come out of the woodwork to defend them.
That is what makes them problematic.
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Insightful)
People only care about DRM when it stops them doing something that they want. Few people care that they can't rip their DVDs (although a few more now that mobile devices capable of playing video are common) but a lot of people care about the unskippable segments at the start. Most people who use the iTunes store don't care about the DRM because it lets them do everything that they want. Same with Steam. The reason people hated the Sony versions is that they didn't work.
If you want people to hate DRM, don't tell them 'DRM is bad,' encourage them to do things that DRM doesn't let them do. For example, copy their music and films to their mobile phones. Then explain why they can't do it in some cases because of the DRM.
Mod parent UP (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't care that the post is already at +5. Petition CowboyNeal to make it +6, because that is precisely how to get average schmoes to understand how digital restrictions are hurting them.
First of all, I don't acknowledge the term "DRM" or "Digital Rights Management," because that does not describe what it's used for. I call it a more layman-friendly "digital restrictions." The whole concept need to be reframed. When people hear "DRM," they think it's some kind of techno-jargon that they don't understand. Even if they find out what it stands for, they think, "Hey, it's to help me manage something, that's a good thing, right?" They need to understand that its sole purpose is restricting them from doing things with their digital stuff. Even if they choose not to do those things, they need to understand that DRM gives them nothing; its only function is to take away.
I tell people all the time about how unbelievably behind we are because of digital restrictions. "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we could watch television on our iPhones? Well, there's no technical reason we can't; it's just that digital restrictions are stopping us." "Did you know that it would be trivially simple to write some slick software so that you could store every CD and DVD you own on a hard drive that costs less than $200 so that you could watch or listen to anything you want, anytime you want, without having to fool with the physical media? Well, we could, if it weren't for digital restrictions."
Now and then, I actually show people some of the stuff that I have and that I can do, given my technical know-how to rip DVDs and stream them to my television, load them on my iPhone, etc. When people "ooh" and "ahh" over it and ask me how they can do such things, I tell them, "Well, it's pretty hard right now, you have to really dig around to find the software and jump through a bunch of hoops to do it. Unfortunately, whenever anyone tries to write software to make it easier or publish such software in a legitimate way, they get sued out of existence by the people who don't want you to be able to do this without paying big bucks. (Or in many of cases, who simply don't want you to be able to do this at all.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The iTunes Store is DRM-free for music in the USA. In the rest of the world, it still has DRM on a number of tracks
Oh really? I was under the impression that most of the world was DRM-free now? Seems Japan still has DRM, but not Europe? Do you know the details?
Additionally, you're correct that some videos in the US itunes store do still have DRM.
Worth noting that Jobs has--from the beginning--pushed for more and more lenient DRM, until it was ultimately removed from music.
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:4, Insightful)
Bull. Apple is evil, granted, but their rise isn't because the masses flock to shiny, polished, gemstones. It's because their products have a history being user-friendly and bringing the power of traditional tech-only gadgetry to those who either can't or won't learn a more complex device.
I use all the mainstream platforms out there, in my work, on a daily basis. They've all got their pitfalls and suck in their own way. However, my iPhone, as a consumer device capable of doing most of the consumer-related things I want from such a device, freakin' rocks — jailbroken or not. And I am certainly not one who generally cares about shiny/polished. My complaints with my iPhone are 99.99% directed towards the telecom industry.
If Apple borked my iPhone by a) hijacking my device and pushing advertisements to my phone or worse b) forced me to interact with said advertisements, you can bet your ass the damn thing would end up in the trash.
Now, on the flipside, if Apple can implement such an action (although I don't see how seeing as how the first FF plugin I install is adblock) in a way that is non-intrusive and doesn't disrupt the joy in using a device then, who cares? Advertisements aren't inherently anti-consumer and are perfectly reasonable on the whole — anti-consumer only exists when consumers don't have a choice. As far as available devices are concerned, nobody can claim the iPhone is the only option available. The market is quite anti-competitive, as a whole, however it stems almost entirely from the telecoms; not device manufacturers.
So, write your congressmen and the FCC and tell them to turn our mobile providers into utilities and stop their collusion practices because that's where your complaint should be. Apple couldn't compete if they implemented forced advertisements in a world where mobile provider choice was on the side of consumers.
my 2 cents.
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:4, Interesting)
They could try. If I bought a device only to find it was using bandwidth I pay for to push ads at me, I would be back at the store demanding a return and refund.
Apple should learn that that kind of advertising doesn't work. Just like those "hover ads" that sit there obstructing content on a web-page until you click them. Whenever I come across one of these, I always leave the web-page and make damn sure I block the site in my hosts file. That kind of in-your-face advertising is offensive, and I will never reward the perpetrator by clicking on it.
I tell you who will like this feature: (Score:5, Insightful)
Hackers.
First thing I thought when I read the blurb. "Wouldn't this be a cherry target for hackers?"
Think about it. An entire API that can halt the whole damn system, pre-emptively appropriate the screen and audio resources, and interact with the user?
How about an application that notices whenever the tcp/ip stack sends out a DNS query to www.somebank.com and puts it's app on the screen over top of your browser? It's a spoof so it looks just like your banking webpage. "Please enter your name and password." Bingo - instant password grabber.
Brilliant notion Apple.
Here's a tip for the future. Whenever you think something is a good idea, imagine what the black hat hacker implications are. Always ask: What if this fell into enemy hands?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't imagine this being part of the built-in software., but I can actually see a use for this. If it were an API for those iPhone app writers who make two versions of their app---a free, ad-supported version and a paid version---then it would help support that model.
The other thought that comes to mind is that if Apple has a patent on this and refuses to license that patent, they can in some small way improve the cell ph
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
By sending business back to Blackberry and the various Android-based phones?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Artificially bending the market to do what you want it to do is not improving anything.
Spoken like someone who wants to have to view ads every five minutes to continue a phone call.
What, are you kidding me? Between you and I, there's only one of us arguing that mandatory ads are a good thing. There's only one of us defending Apple's ridiculous patent and methods. And I do believe that there's only one of us that currently owns an iPhone (and it's not me).
those apps would quickly get deleted and never run again, and there would be lots of negative ratings as a result.
Exactly, the results are all negative.
Thus abusing such an API would be counter to the developers' best interests.
Yeah, spammers and scammers really seem to care about their reputation.
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Informative)
The patent itself [freepatentsonline.com] has screenshots of a Mac desktop, so I'd imagine this is along the lines of "Here's a subsidised computer, but you'll have to watch our ads" - which has been done many times before. Here they present a "new" implementation.
On the other hand, I'd hate to be in their legal team the first time someone comes unstuck using Skype (or equiv) from their computer for an emergency call, and obviously they've also written the patent to apply to stuff like phones & PDAs with reference to iTunes (see [0048] on p12). Odd that they didn't include language to be able to bypass this advertising for certain instances of the function being blocked (e.g. dialling 911 rather than dialling a chum).
I wonder what would happen if you 127.0.0.1 the advertising IPs in your hosts file? Conceivably you'd be bricking the box (while breaking the ToS you signed up to, too, no doubt).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was thinking more along the lines of their new tablet multi-function device rumored for the near future. Free games, cheap e-books & e-mags, subsidized & limited 'net access...all for the price of some horrible flash ads that make you want to put your fist through the screen. Makes the Sony Reader look even better.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect this would most likely be tied to content and not actual products apple produces. what if, instead of paying 2 bucks at the iTunes store for an episode of a TV show you could download it with for free with 4 forced 30 second ads (not that much different from hulu but you cant get around it at all). Would you consider that option? I think I would.
Considering the other stories we have seen (Score:3, Interesting)
Story of Apple talking to Entertainment/Hollywood/TV executives re monthly subscription fee....
This is the most likely scenario for their intent.
This would fit both the desktop and mobile devices.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You don't 127.0.0.1 the advertising IP. You point them to a fake server which only serves up invisible ads.
Re:Customer Service : My Screen is Broken (Score:5, Insightful)
Hello Apple? I have a problem with my iPhone. Every time it shows an advertisement, the screen gets smashed. Can you help?
Yes. You signed up for the ad-supported $50 iPhone, instead of the carrier-subsidized $200 iPhone. Simply return it to your AT&T store, pay the $450 ad-supported-phone termination fee.
You will then be given the option to pay $200 for the AT&T-subsidized iPhone which will not display ads. Monthly charges will apply.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Any device containing such technology is going to get on a black or hack list very fast.
I'm annoyed enough by all the splash screens thrown in the face every time I start a program.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
(Puts on Carnac hat) "Switch to BSD"
(opens envelope) "What will everyone do if the Linux 2012 problem isn't fixed by mid 2011?"
Fortunately (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fortunately (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fortunately (Score:5, Informative)
This tech is already in use on nbc.com, cwtv.com, syfy.com, and so on. When you watch their streaming videos, they expect you to click "continue" after watching the advertisement. It's their way of verifying you seeing the ad.
Re:Fortunately (Score:4, Insightful)
I actually prefer the sites that have a "continue" button after an ad to the ones that just go right back into the program. The continue button allows me to wander off and do something else while the ad is playing without having to worry about missing anything.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Way to give the game away, by the way! Asshole.
Re:Fortunately (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Fortunately (Score:5, Insightful)
You can wander off, and come back to find:
Thank you for watching the advertisement, please enter the advertised product's name to continue.
On a bigger scale, does it bother anyone else that we live in a world where we pay for things by watching advertisements? The advertisers then charge us extra money for the products they're selling so they can pay for the advertisements, which in turn take up our time. So in a way these advertisements cost us double:
... and we don't enjoy either part!
1. we spend the time to watch them
2. we collectively endure the cost of producing and distributing these advertisements
So, what is the purpose of an advertisement? If a new product is coming out, we can find out on the review sites to figure out what sucks and what rocks. Maybe the advertisement's purpose is to appeal to your weaknesses and make you get a product without looking at the reviews. In my experience I have discovered that usually the crappiest products/services are the ones with the heaviest advertising and the good ones are busy doing real work instead of wasting time/money on advertisements.
I think advertisements have gone too far, and advertising is a drain on the resources of a world with finite resources.
How about they don't waste? Don't waste time making the ad, don't waste money airing the ad, don't waste my time making me watch a stupid ad. Invest money in making a better product that you genuinely care about instead of trying to convince people to buy your tripe.
Re:Citizenship (Score:3)
Citizen, would you like to know more?
Re:Citizenship (Score:4, Insightful)
My wife doesn't like the movie, and can't get past the "extreme violence." She didn't see the strong parallels between the Global Federation and the 1940s era Nazis. Yes Virginia, the Nazis are the good guys. Maybe that's where the hate comes from.
Re: (Score:2)
Does the US require that a patent need to be brought to use to be kept valid? Quick scan of Wikipedia says that some countries require it, but doesn't list which ones do.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. The content providers being lined up for the media consumption device commonly referred to as "the Apple Tablet".
Or how would you go about cost-effectively bringing enough content providers on board to make said chimera a useful product out of the box and avoid a Kindle-like fate for it? If you do have any better idea than Messr. Jobs, send your résumé to Amazon immediately...
Re: (Score:2)
Who knows, maybe they are doing this to prevent 3rd party vendors from making software that does this on an Apple platform (and preventing patent based blockage of vendors on other platforms?)
Re:Fortunately (Score:5, Interesting)
Depends on what the technology is being used for, doesn't it?
As an example... let's say they wanted to offer a free cellular service. In exchange for your free service, you had to watch 1 ad every 48 hours of real time, or every 30 minutes of talk time. A technology like this could allow them a way to guarantee to their investors that the ads would actually be watched, and would make it easier to fund such a service, no? They could even program the towers to return ads for businesses in range of the tower itself, essentially using geolocating in order to target the ads to people who might actually buy from the businesses in question without having to actually spy on you at all. They could implement it to be essentially non-intrusive while you're using the service... for the free cell phone example, it could, for example, queue up an ad so that once you're done your current conversation you need to watch it in order to make another call (but wouldn't block incoming calls)... it doesn't have to interrupt you mid-sentence with advertising.
It's all about how they use it that really determines whether it's an ethical patent. If they're using it as a way to guarantee funding for an essentially free service, then great. If they're using it to force advertising down your throats when you've already paid or are paying for the service, then bad.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
you had to watch 1 ad ... every 30 minutes of talk time.
"Yes, I understand. To close this deal, we need to... Hang on. I have to click on....
[silence]
Hello? Are you still there? My stupid phone interrupted the call to make me click on this ad."
Re:This makes a somewhat unjustified assumption. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're assuming that the telco in this fictional/theoretical example wouldn't exert some kind of control over the kinds of ads that get played over its network. TV stations routinely refuse to air some kinds of advertisement if they feel that it doesn't meet the corporate ethical image that they're trying to portray to the public.
Also, there's a very big difference between what airtime actually costs and what the cell companies charge you... especially when you start buying time in bulk. When you can add 1000 minutes of talk time for $5/month and they're still making a profit off of it, you know that the actual cost to the telco is nowhere near as high as they're charging you. I'm also making the (possibly wrong) assumption that given a captive audience and some kind of test at the end of the ad to check that you actually did pay attention, the price that you could command for the ad might be somewhat higher than what you'd pay to put something on broadcast TV or an Internet banner exposure.
*shrugs* it was just put forward as an example of a way that they could monetize a patent like this without actually having an evil intent. The truth is, I have no idea what they're planning with it... it could actually be one of those patents that people file in order to prevent a technology from ever making it to market.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple will gladly license this technology to their competitors; what easier way is there to kill of your competitors than letting them do it themselves while paying you for it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They can go ahead and use it if they want. It won't affect me one bit.
I can see this blowing up in their face if they try to implement it broadly. For example, what happens if I am at a client site using a Macbook to drive a presentation to a C-level audience, and an "ad" for a competitor product (or some other inappropriate ad) pops up and I have to spend time fumbling with a multiple choice "quiz?"
No Thanks.
Re:Fortunately (Score:5, Funny)
What has changed? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What has changed? (Score:4, Funny)
Interesting use of abbreviations. Why not go all out?
cld b an inbuilt sstm in/, 2 rpt som imp. FAs, just incaso som ppl miss'em.
gss they cld calc. the no. of comms. by unq commtrs n stories whc huv lowst r rpsted.
There.
Great idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a wonderful notion, but I can't think of a time when a corporation patented something bad soley as a way of preventing someone from using it. Maybe they won't bother using it, but if somebody else does, you can bet they'll meet them at the licencing table rather than sue them into non-existence.
Re:Great idea (Score:4, Informative)
I think you'll find that a cursory look at Pharmaceutical patents will reveal a large number of cures that no big player in medical marketplace would ever want to see in the wild, let alone see a vast population of people in need have access to at affordable prices [allafrica.com].
Look also at Microsoft research: they come up with some extraordinary technologies/solutions that would no doubt undermine the broader, stable market for their existing inferior products if available on a desktop near you.
I believe that all these nonsense Apple patents relating to advertising may reveal that Apple may soon ship an ad-encumbered version of it's OS for Intel hardware more generic than that already in the Apple line.
Re: (Score:2)
Right,
The only rational explanation of this patent, is that they are patenting the sociopathic behavior of the class which brought you singles adds on every telephone pole.
- which of course suggests a disturbing idea that individuals could invent crimes, by patenting the activity.
weird, if laudable in this case.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually that's completely incorrect. Why is it that every time /. sees a patent, we get a dozen posters who can't be bothered to read the patent claims yet talk like they know what the patent covers?
Yes, the patent has something to do with advertising and encouraging users to watch it. No, that doesn't mean that everything that's ever been done to encourage people to watch an ad would be covered or, equivalently, can stand as prior art.
Every independent claim in the patent talks about a featuer in an ope
I would not purchase this device. (Score:4, Insightful)
Annoyance ads (Score:5, Insightful)
College Humor had Volkswagen ads I liked. They were amusing, and there was a 5 second "This video brought to you by Volkswagen" or something before the video.
College Humor later had another sponsor that demanded a 35 second mandatory viewing BEFORE the video played. I don't recall who. I do recall they annoyed me and I didn't care for their product; I'd buy from their competitors if I did.
If the ads piss you off, the product pisses you off. Fuck that. Don't buy shit that's advertised through irritation.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I find that there is very little content that interests me enough to view a mandatory ad. I would imagine there's even less content for which I would waste my time answering a question before being able to view it.
I predict most content "protected" by Apple's new mandatory ad system will go unwatched.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Local monopolies (Score:2)
I don't recall who. I do recall they annoyed me and I didn't care for their product; I'd buy from their competitors if I did.
Patronizing an advertiser's competitors isn't always practical because not every market is competitive. For example, if an energy company advertises in such an annoying manner, and that company provides electricity or natural gas to your city, where will you get your energy? If both the local cable company and the local phone company advertise in such an annoying manner, how do you plan to get Internet access?
Nothing new, but I can imagine horrible outcomes.. (Score:5, Funny)
* Help, I am being attacked!
- Hold on sir, I will <click>
iPhone:
Video of security-spray followed by the question "Would this product have helped in your situation?"
Ansver: Yes
- <click> Sir, are you still there?
- Sir?
- hello?
* gurgle, gurgle. (bloody mess on ground...)
Re:Nothing new, but I can imagine horrible outcome (Score:5, Insightful)
This is 911.
Help, I am being attacked!
Hold on sir, I will--
Sir, are you still there?
Sir? Hello? Gurgle, gurgle.
(Bloody mess on ground...)
Congratulations, you win our haiku contest!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Nothing new, but I can imagine horrible outcome (Score:4, Insightful)
So how well do the before and after statistics in locations around the world that have changed their firearm policies support your assertion?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who the hell cares about firearm homicides?
How much did all homicides change?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Indeed. I'm a progressive, and the huge mistake that progressivism has constantly made in history is attempting to ban effects, not causes. Prohibition, gun bans, etc.
Even stuff like consumer and lending protection laws, which at least don't have any bad side effects, but are less useful than actual consumer education would be. Sometimes stopgaps are reasonable, but we really do need to get to the root of the problem: People have no idea how to manage their financial life.
Hell, education isn't the only so
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, that's a sorta vague term, isn't it? OTOH, all political descriptions are sorta vague terms. ;)
I, personally, am along the lines of Woodrow Wilson (domestically) and FDR. Namely, I agree that the government should attempt to implement the FDR's 'Second Bill of Rights', although it's absurd to call those 'rights'. They should, however, be government goals.
Members of a political philosophies need to be very aware where that philosophy has failed in the past. (Something I fear the conservatives are abo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Handguns are the great equalizer.
Without them, some people can injury and kill another person, without that other person being able to stop them. The strong can prey on the weak.
With handguns, all people can injury and kill others.
But this also means all people can fight back when the other person tries to do that to them.
It's a basic equality thing. If some people have the ability to hurt others (And some of that subset, in fact, does.), those others should also have that ability to hurt them back.
Law
Customer goodwill ? (Score:2)
Yes, this can be done. Technically quite easily (perhaps circumventable by a few). The real question is whether a seller/advertiser would _want_ to. The purpose behind advertising to to attract customers and stimulate sales. This requires creating a positive buzz (feelgood) about the product or service. Locking a machine is unlikely to do this.
OTOH, this technology could easily be used in cases where goodwill is less desired (less user choice) like corporate computed-based training requirements.
Unfortunately some will (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
My point is this is unlikely to be come a dominant marketing mode.
Re: (Score:2)
Next thing you know, Apple will be lobbying Congress to pass a law that requires you to view and respond to 5 or more ads a day.
You know, for the good of the economy and such. I cringe.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I understand your point about publicity being generally good, particularly in an under-informed world. However, creating user annoyance without countervailing user benefit (low price) is not likely to endure past "flash in the pan".
Who needs subliminal messages when you have this? (Score:2)
You WILL like this iPod ad.
Dupe? (Score:2)
This is basically the same story that was posted some time ago [slashdot.org] or am I missing something?
One step forward, three steps back. (Score:2, Insightful)
It increasingly seems like the major software companies are determined to use any CPU cycles wrung out of Moore's law beyond 2005 levels exclusively for their own benefit, leaving us with our 3 ghz 1 gb machine, and quite content. This sort of nonsense removes the primary benefit of a computer, which is its ability to do things for you without your input. Now it does things for someone else, and it requires your input.
Talk about losing customers (Score:2)
I saw this last week, and I am trying to figure out why. It destroys all usablity of the device. Can you imagine to dial 911 and have an AD block it. Or watching a video and having it interupted by ads that you have to click through
so I am scratching head as to why apple patented this. If they ever used it they would lose whatcustomers they have.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you imagine to dial 911 and have an AD block it.
Oh give me a break. As horrible an idea as I think this patent is, you and I are both fully aware that no one would ever block a 911 call with ads. Even if Apple were completely, 100% evil (and that looks more and more possible every day), they'd still want to avoid lawsuits caused by their devices blocking emergency calls.
So lay off the "ZOMG what if they block 911 calls?!" FUD, because only an idiot would consider that to be an actual possibility.
Don't like it? Don't buy the product (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Buy a campaign of competitor's product... (Score:3, Funny)
Buy a campaign of competitor's product using this technology to advertize it.
Massive profit.
I am sure it's not as bad as you think (Score:2)
They will probably just use this to offer 'alternative revenue models' to things like Ipod software updates. Instead of paying $10 every six months to keep your Ipod Touch software current they will offer you the 'opportunity' to download the ad-supported version which will quiz you periodically about the 'zinger' at the end of the most recent Mac Vs PC ad spot.
See, what's the harm in that?
Apple is evil (Score:2, Insightful)
As opposed to who? (Score:2)
Apple is different in that they do care about the user experience, almost to the detriment of all else. Microsoft is happy to bombard you with prompts, popups and whatnot, and that's just the operating system! Just this morning I get to my computer and I've got a "there are unused icons on your desktop" message that simply will not go away until I click on it, which then starts the "cleanup wizard" that I can cancel. I can prevent this from happening with a registry tweak, you're right, but why do I need to
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why can't people see that Apple is evil?
Not evil, but amoral. All corporations are by their very nature.
Headline: "Apple Patents..." (Score:2)
Reality: "Apple has filed a patent application..."
Consider how it's used (Score:2)
I don't see this technology as being bad at all.
Suppose Apple would like to give away a free or reduced-price iPhone, for instance. A user not willing to pay for the ad-free iPhone would now be a potential customer if they were willing to deal with periodic advertisements with Apple recouping the lost hardware profits from the advertising. From a consumer's point of view, this is just another option: if you don't want to pay for or use ad-subsidized hardware, pay for the ad-free version or buy something
Getting ads even though you pay (Score:2)
if you don't want to pay for or use ad-subsidized hardware, pay for the ad-free version
I have relatives who pay for cable television, yet there are still ads. What's the ad-free version of cable news or cable sports?
or buy something else.
If an ad-subsidized product undercuts the market to the point where everybody else either licenses Apple's patent or leaves the market, what should I buy instead? At some point, to avoid being annoyed by advertisements, one has to leave behind most of the twentieth century, let alone the twenty-first.
Want to bypass the enforceable advertising? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Great (Score:2)
DVDs have been doing that for decades (Score:2)
Hope it ain't the future of AppleTV (Score:2)
because I really am starting to see Apple in bed more and more with Hollywood.
One of the few things that makes over the net movies more agreeable to me is that unlike blu-ray I do not have to skip past ads for eight other movies, if they allow me to skip. (fortunately some blu ray players don't enforce it)
Sends a positive message to customers (Score:2)
Assuming your customers are advertisers, rather than the poor fools who are buying the devices. This is only a patent, not a product, so maybe they won't actually do it. I find it instructive, when looking at a company, to think to yourself "Who are the *real* customers?". The customer is "always" right. If you get a device that behaves like this, you know you're not the real customer and you can't expect to be taken seriously by the company you bought it from.
Good Way to Kill Off Sales (Score:2)
That would certainly turn me away from using Apple products in a hurry! Here's hoping Apple filed that patent only to block others from doing this. This is the kind of thing that I would expect to come out of Micro$oft, MPAA, or RIAA.
The very people that use Apple's products do so to get away from this sort of intrusion. While I'm writing, I don't want to be interrupted at all by anything! To have this sort of intrusion into my my workspace on a regular basis would cause a loss of productivity on my part. A
Pay Attention (Score:2)
Adobe has prior art. (Score:2)
flash, pdfs ...
Heck, even Microsoft has prior art - system modal dialog boxes have been around for ages. UAC is just the latest example.
Sufferers of Restless Thumb Syndrome, Unite! (Score:2)
What will it take to un-freeze it? (Score:2)
Will it un-freeze if I throw it against a wall?
How about if I return it to Apple for being defective?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't care if they implement this (Score:2)
After what they did to the tethering I don't think I'm buying any other Apple product. That really annoyed me. As if they weren't crippled enough right out of the box, the so called "updates" cripples them even more!
Hi, I'm an Mac, (well, an iPhone) and I get more crippled every time you update the software so you can do less and less stuff every day! F0ck Them!
For a company that doesn't like (Score:2)
n900 (Score:4, Funny)
Does this patent mean Nokia can't use it on the N900 (and successors)? if so, "Good, well done Apple." Tough shit iPhone users though.
Apple patented this? (Score:3, Insightful)
Awesome. I don't buy Apple products. Now no one else can do this without paying Apple. Who's going to do that? I'll never have to deal with this. Awesome. Thanks, Apple.
Apple officially adopts Evil(tm) (Score:3, Funny)
After bricking unlocked iPhones, kicking applications off the iPhone store that might even slightly compete with iTunes in the far future and filing a wave of patents on basic well-known computer science as well as some of the most obnoxious ideas for advertising ever invented, Apple Inc. today filed a Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission declaring that it was openly adopting Evil as a corporate policy [today.com].
“Fuck it,” said Steve Jobs to an audience of soul-mortgaged thralls, “we’re evil. But our stuff is sooo good. You’ll keep taking our abuse. You love it, you worm. Because our stuff is great. It’s shiny and it’s pretty and it’s cool and it works. It’s not like you’ll go back to a Windows Mobile phone. Ha! Ha!”
Steve Ballmer of Microsoft was incensed at the news. “Our evil is better than anyone’s evil! No-one sweats the details of evil like Microsoft! Where’s your antitrust trial, you polo-necked bozo? We’ve worked hard on our evil! Our Zune’s as evil as an iPod any day! I won’t let my kids use a lesser evil! We’re going to do an ad about that! I’ll be in it! With Jerry Seinfeld! Beat that! Asshole.”
“Of course, we’re still not evil,” said Sergey Brin of Google. “You can trust us on this. Every bit of data about you, your life and the house you live in is strictly a secret between you and our marketing department. But, hypothetically, if we were evil, it’s not like you’re going to use Windows Live Search. Ha! Ha! I’m sorry, that’s my ‘spreading good cheer’ laugh. Really.”
Re: (Score:2)
you forgot the protestant belief predestination also leading to the cultural belief that anyone suffering in this world had it coming because they were going to hell anyway and deserved it.
I paid for this radio yet there are ads (Score:2)
If you buy a device, you should NOT be forced to deal with advertising.
I buy an FM radio, but all stations have advertising on them. (Yes, NPR pledge drives count as advertising.) So I am forced to either deal with advertising or not use the radio.
I buy a TV, but all stations have advertising on them. (Yes, PBS pledge drives count as advertising.) So I am forced to either deal with advertising or not use the TV.